A.G. Human Being and Citizen Lecture presented by Agnes Gellen Callard Why did Socrates Die???

Some Thoughts on Socrates Based on the Talk Socrates was a strange character. His life centered mostly on refutation he wanted to refute the people he thought were wise. He also defied the norms of society. When Chaerephon told him of the Oracles statement of him being the wisest, Socrates just proceeded to try and prove the Oracle wrong. It is possible that the Apology is a coming of age story depicting Socrates having a character change (on the assumption that he wasnt trying to refute everyone before). In his way of thinking, Socrates was misunderstood to an extent in Athenian society; while he believed that one must try to refute everyone, one does not have to refute everything they say. The jury may have been under the impression that Socrates would be more of a nuisance and was trying to trick or manipulate people with his questions. Another way of looking at Socrates attempts to interrogate people is that Socrates saw philosophy as something meant for sharing, and would discuss topics with passers-by to learn and get ideas. Socrates may not even be trying to defend himself at his trial but instead philosophizing to his audience! Argument A central argument put forward was that Socrates, in his speeches, was not ironic although the jury thought he was trying to be.

Socrates had a reputation for irony, for being controversial. In every conversation, he would claim to know nothing but ended up dominating the discussion, which resulted in the jury misinterpreting his intentions. Another question posed was whether Socrates failed as a philosopher; why do some of his arguments not work or lead nowhere?

Reflection I felt that the lecture of Ms. Callard was very insightful and probed in more depth Socratic irony across the books written by Plato. One of the more interesting parts was when she walked us through the argument of Socrates on the allegation that he corrupted the youth. She mentioned a couple of very interesting possible holes in Socrates argument, such as the Partial Corruption Objection that challenges the universality of the assumption that wicked people harm their associates. Perhaps Socrates, the alleged corruptor, can be the one person who can avoid being corrupted though wicked people surround him. A dilemma results from this: 1. Socrates corrupts by contact which would mean that he himself would be prone to being corrupted by the people who he infected

A.G. 2. Socrates corrupts through manipulation, intentionally becoming a bad influence on others and corrupting their souls without them knowing

In both cases, Socrates would emerge as the most evil of all since he can be said to be equal to the people who he corrupts (through infection) or because he isnt (by manipulation). We had similar discussions like this where we tried to pick holes in Socrates' arguments and analyze his logic. I could also relate to the way she put all of Socrates actions into context and how the jury might have reacted to his comments. Overall, it was a good way to end the night and close the first quarter of HBC at the U of C!